Re: Minolta DiMAGE 7Hi First Look - noise issue

Thanks Phil for the quick "first look" of the D7Hi, as I would like to get a new digicam after photokina, I am interested in the 7Hi and a few other comparable cams like the 717, and I read it with curiosity.

The central issue I am interested in is - of course - the often mentioned noise issue.

Having read through many Minolta Forum posts I learned that the noise can be - apparently - considerably reduced by setting the contrast to "-2" when shooting. I´d wish very much that you could - when doing further test shots - include this easy option. If this could adress the problem partly it would make my decision much easier indeed.

Greetings Bernhard

Should the user HAVE to do this to avoid noise?

Doesn't this introduce an additional image manipulation step after shooting?

Bernie Ess said:

Thanks Phil for the quick "first look" of the D7Hi, as I would like
to get a new digicam after photokina, I am interested in the 7Hi
and a few other comparable cams like the 717, and I read it with
curiosity.
The central issue I am interested in is - of course - the often
mentioned noise issue.
Having read through many Minolta Forum posts I learned that the
noise can be - apparently - considerably reduced by setting the
contrast to "-2" when shooting. I´d wish very much that you could -
when doing further test shots - include this easy option. If this
could adress the problem partly it would make my decision much
easier indeed.

Greetings Bernhard

Click to expand...

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

Phil Askey said:

Should the user HAVE to do this to avoid noise?

Doesn't this introduce an additional image manipulation step after
shooting?

Click to expand...

Of course this should have been done by Minolta, but as it has not been done (and it is unlikely that Minolta will change it now that the camera seems already in production), it would be at least useful to know that a setting simple as that helps. If it doesn´t help it would make the noise a permanent problem.

BTW as the noise seems lower with contrast at -2, it seems that its only by the in-camera processing that annoying amounts of noise are introduced (by boosting the contrast), so in a way one could call this an additional manipulation step, as you call it.

Bernie Ess said:

Having read through many Minolta Forum posts I learned that the
noise can be - apparently - considerably reduced by setting the
contrast to "-2" when shooting. I´d wish very much that you could -
when doing further test shots - include this easy option. If this
could adress the problem partly it would make my decision much
easier indeed.

Greetings Bernhard

Click to expand...

Bernie I hope you don't mind if I jump in here. I'm a long time noise critic not just for the 7's but as far back as the Oly C2500! Went through it with the E10 which at the time (pre d7) was considered the noisest, but then came the D7 and took that honor with flying colors : )

Ok here's the real deal. Your paying BIG bucks for a digital camera that will be out dated in a year! You should expect the best possible quality offered at that time. Now in the case of the E10 which was not as bad as the D7 folks were employing various noise reduction tricks in PS and third party solutions. Effective to some degree. Noise is not always a problem. But if it's already visible at the lowest ISO 100, it will only quickly deteriate as you try to use higher ISO's, and Bernie those higher ISO's really do come in handy!!

Now the D7 was a disappiontment on almost all fronts, the 7i had major improvements! And would have been a great camera if not for two things. 1. Noise
2. below average resolution power for a 5MP

Minolta follows up with another D7 in 6 months? Sure looks better! Nice to have a rubber grip too! But it still has the same level of noise. I'll bet it also does below average in the res test too. If only Minolta addresed these two issues!!!!

Bernie, I really don't show any brand loyalty. I am just as upset with Nikon for delivering a GREAT CoolPix, the 5700, but falling short in the only mediocre AF, and terrible MF, still no dedicated hotshoe, shame on you Nikon! What saves the 5700 however is it's amazing image quality! See my side by side comparison of the 5700 with my D1X and 28-70 AFS f/2.8 lens. Amazing! http://www.pixelwars.net/d1x_5700/index.html Still I am very disappionted with Nikon.

Now how should we feel about the 7Hi? It still falls very LOW. The only saving grace for it is it's lens focal range. So if you don't mind the noise, and res, or extra work in PS, I guess it's ok. But there is better out there now, and it's certain better will be around the next corner too : )

Kindest Regards!
Jim K
--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!
http://digitalphotonews.ws

I guess that is a question. Whether the noise is introduced by camera processing or whether it is inherent and simply disguised with low contrast. In other words, if you use low contrast to get rid of some of the noise and then increase the contrast in Photoshop do you increase the noise again?

Frank B

Bernie Ess said:

Phil Askey said:

Should the user HAVE to do this to avoid noise?

Doesn't this introduce an additional image manipulation step after
shooting?

Click to expand...

Of course this should have been done by Minolta, but as it has not
been done (and it is unlikely that Minolta will change it now that
the camera seems already in production), it would be at least
useful to know that a setting simple as that helps. If it doesn´t
help it would make the noise a permanent problem.
BTW as the noise seems lower with contrast at -2, it seems that its
only by the in-camera processing that annoying amounts of noise are
introduced (by boosting the contrast), so in a way one could call
this an additional manipulation step, as you call it.

Click to expand...

Phil Askey said:

Should the user HAVE to do this to avoid noise?

Click to expand...

Eh, too much work pressing a button and turning the control wheel two nocthes? And you only have to do that once. Low in-camera sharpening helps a lot, too. Post processing is necessary anyway, 5 MPix files are too big for my monitor.

Member said:

Doesn't this introduce an additional image manipulation step after
shooting?

Click to expand...

Huh? It makes the image less contrasty i.e. less in-camera manipulation. Without this trick the shadows are usually too dark requiring an extra step in post-processing. Of course, if the scene is dull (no direct sunlight etc.) contrast -2 will result in a dull picture, but harsh sunlight sometimes calls for contrast -3.

BTW, when you complained about Minolta releasing a new model too soon (so, now it's a bad thing that they listen their customers?) you totally ignored the firmware upgrades they have offered to old customers.

BTW2, zoom and histogram in quick review mode are not new features, although the press release tries to make them look like that.

BTW3, AWB does not make much sense when one is using studio flashes...

BTW4, once againg you have completely ignored the wireless flash system.

Marko

Bernie,

I hope you dont mind a little sarcasm here (to make a point):

As noise mostly occurs en dark areas, how about shooting only under circumstances where there are no shadows? this would also render photos with very little noise. ;o)

best regards
alfred

Bernie Ess said:

Phil Askey said:

Should the user HAVE to do this to avoid noise?

Doesn't this introduce an additional image manipulation step after
shooting?

Click to expand...

Of course this should have been done by Minolta, but as it has not
been done (and it is unlikely that Minolta will change it now that
the camera seems already in production), it would be at least
useful to know that a setting simple as that helps. If it doesn´t
help it would make the noise a permanent problem.
BTW as the noise seems lower with contrast at -2, it seems that its
only by the in-camera processing that annoying amounts of noise are
introduced (by boosting the contrast), so in a way one could call
this an additional manipulation step, as you call it.

Click to expand...

--

=================
http://www.pbase.com/abudschitz
=================

of course, my point was .... how much is somebody willing to compromise other parameters (exposure, ISO, aperture, contrast, etc...) to compensate for a camera's shortcomings (noise)?

shouldnt a camera do what the photographer wants to do instead of a photographer doing what makes the camera look best? ... what else will be altered by changing contrast to -2 ???

care to take a (standardized) photo in "contrast 0" and the same in "contrast -2" and then post the 2 histograms? ... just trying to help

alfred

Alfred said:

I hope you dont mind a little sarcasm here (to make a point):

As noise mostly occurs en dark areas, how about shooting only under
circumstances where there are no shadows? this would also render
photos with very little noise. ;o)

best regards
alfred

Bernie Ess said:

Phil Askey said:

Should the user HAVE to do this to avoid noise?

Doesn't this introduce an additional image manipulation step after
shooting?

Click to expand...

Of course this should have been done by Minolta, but as it has not
been done (and it is unlikely that Minolta will change it now that
the camera seems already in production), it would be at least
useful to know that a setting simple as that helps. If it doesn´t
help it would make the noise a permanent problem.
BTW as the noise seems lower with contrast at -2, it seems that its
only by the in-camera processing that annoying amounts of noise are
introduced (by boosting the contrast), so in a way one could call
this an additional manipulation step, as you call it.

Click to expand...

--

=================
http://www.pbase.com/abudschitz
=================

Click to expand...

--

=================
http://www.pbase.com/abudschitz
=================

Alfred said:

of course, my point was .... how much is somebody willing to
compromise other parameters (exposure, ISO, aperture, contrast,
etc...) to compensate for a camera's shortcomings (noise)?

Click to expand...

First of all according to posters noise with the D7 occurs also in bright blue skys, and then its been often said that the D7 pics have more contrast in normal settings than other cameras. So where is the problem in setting it to -2 if thsi adresses the 2 problems? I would easily do this if the pics get much better then. Cause after what I see they look quite natural compared to the Sony...

Correct me if I am wrong, somwhere on this site it stated that the same 5 mega pixel Sony image sensor used in the 707 ( probably the 717) is used by Minolta. Since there is no noise issue with the Sony camera, the question begs - "What is Minolta doing for the noise to be an issue in their product? Could software be the culprit, if so a fix should not be to difficult to implement.

If the noise issue was addressed than the 7Hi this would be a serious contender to the Sony line - are you listing Minlota.

Dietmar

it's simple. Sony and other companies are applying much more aggressive noise reduction systems in their cameras than Minolta is. It's not what Minolta is doing with the software, but really more to the pint what the other companies are.

Aggressive noise reduction will of course help to reduce noise but can also cause other problems by doing it. Minolta's method is to do less incamera processing and allow the option of working with it later on in post processing. if you want to work with the image it hasn't already been overly affected by too much incamera processing. Remember, once it's been processed in camera it can't be reversed but if it's left to do afterwards you have the options open to you.

Personally, I feel the issue of noise is WAY overblown on the D7/D7i cameras. The problem is people looking at images at full size on their monitors and than judging the noise level. sure, when I do that I can see some noise in my images from my D7i, but on the other hand, there is NO noise what-so-ever in my printed images. I couldn't care less how much noise i see or don't see on the monitor - only how my printed images look. and as I've said there is NO noise at all in my printed pictures and I have printed them to 16 x 20. I'd print larger but that's the size limit my local store can print in-house.

Dietmar Fichter said:

Correct me if I am wrong, somwhere on this site it stated that the
same 5 mega pixel Sony image sensor used in the 707 ( probably the
717) is used by Minolta. Since there is no noise issue with the
Sony camera, the question begs - "What is Minolta doing for the
noise to be an issue in their product? Could software be the
culprit, if so a fix should not be to difficult to implement.

If the noise issue was addressed than the 7Hi this would be a
serious contender to the Sony line - are you listing Minlota.

Dietmar

Click to expand...

Alfred said:

As noise mostly occurs en dark areas, how about shooting only under
circumstances where there are no shadows? this would also render
photos with very little noise. ;o)

Click to expand...

Well a lot of the noise is in pictures containing blue sky, which is not a dark area. There's absolutely no excuse for Minolta not fixing this problem (over three different models), including the new 7hi..

Sincerely, Bob the Printer

I agree with The Man. I have printed a Super A3 print using a friend's D7i set to default setting and there is no visible noise in the print. So why all excitement the about something that does not show in practice?

The Man said:

• only how my printed images look. and as I've said there is NO

noise at all in my printed pictures and I have printed them to 16 x
20. I'd print larger but that's the size limit my local store can
print in-house.

Dietmar Fichter said:

Correct me if I am wrong, somwhere on this site it stated that the
same 5 mega pixel Sony image sensor used in the 707 ( probably the
717) is used by Minolta. Since there is no noise issue with the
Sony camera, the question begs - "What is Minolta doing for the
noise to be an issue in their product? Could software be the
culprit, if so a fix should not be to difficult to implement.

If the noise issue was addressed than the 7Hi this would be a
serious contender to the Sony line - are you listing Minlota.

Dietmar

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
John

John Rushton said:

I agree with The Man. I have printed a Super A3 print using a
friend's D7i set to default setting and there is no visible noise
in the print. So why all excitement the about something that does
not show in practice?

Click to expand...

because it DOES show on prints. It's not rocket science to figure out the better the image is to begin with the farther you can take it or enlarge it. If a image has visible noise at 100% which is the actual file size equal to a negative with dust or scratches obviously it will not majically disapear as some will have us believe. I have seen many prints with visible noise from various consumer cameras. Now the d7's have the highest level of noise from any 5MP camera and we are expected to believe that it just doesn't show up on 8x10 or larger prints? If you buy that email me because I have a wonderful bridge for sale too. It's so very simple, if you don't mind the noise, that's great, have a ball, but don't try misleading others in to believing there is no problem with the noise. The only way the noise is not visible is if you down size the image for the web, or make smaller prints. Why some people feel the need to defend a company for inferior quality issues is beyond me. It's called, denial, justify, excuse, and deny some more. Thankfully common sense usually prevails. If you start of with more noise then any other camera, obviously there is a problem otherwise why even discus noise at all? The mentality that it doesn't matter if you see it on screen, you won't see it on print is so ridiculous. If that's the case then why bother with noise reduction? Why spend $3000 for a camera with no noise if the D7i which has the most noise of all, will still get prints without noise? Now about that bridge for sale...

Regards,
Jim K

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!
http://digitalphotonews.ws

I agree with Jim K. I was so excited when the D7 was announced and so dissappointed when it came out and with every model since.

My question is: Is there anyone out there that can confirm that the 707/717 and the D7's have the same sensor?

Jim K said:

John Rushton said:

I agree with The Man. I have printed a Super A3 print using a
friend's D7i set to default setting and there is no visible noise
in the print. So why all excitement the about something that does
not show in practice?

Click to expand...

because it DOES show on prints. It's not rocket science to figure
out the better the image is to begin with the farther you can take
it or enlarge it. If a image has visible noise at 100% which is the
actual file size equal to a negative with dust or scratches
obviously it will not majically disapear as some will have us
believe. I have seen many prints with visible noise from various
consumer cameras. Now the d7's have the highest level of noise from
any 5MP camera and we are expected to believe that it just doesn't
show up on 8x10 or larger prints? If you buy that email me because
I have a wonderful bridge for sale too. It's so very simple, if you
don't mind the noise, that's great, have a ball, but don't try
misleading others in to believing there is no problem with the
noise. The only way the noise is not visible is if you down size
the image for the web, or make smaller prints. Why some people feel
the need to defend a company for inferior quality issues is beyond
me. It's called, denial, justify, excuse, and deny some more.
Thankfully common sense usually prevails. If you start of with more
noise then any other camera, obviously there is a problem otherwise
why even discus noise at all? The mentality that it doesn't matter
if you see it on screen, you won't see it on print is so
ridiculous. If that's the case then why bother with noise
reduction? Why spend $3000 for a camera with no noise if the D7i
which has the most noise of all, will still get prints without
noise? Now about that bridge for sale...

Regards,
Jim K

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!
http://digitalphotonews.ws

Click to expand...

ah, Jim - I just stated i get NO noise at all in my prints and another poster comfirmed he gets the same results. Are you calling both of us liars? Since you don't own a D7i where do you feel you have the gall to disagree with my results. You have been on a crusade against every Minolta digital camera from day one and fnd every possible discussion to throw in your "so called" expert knowelge of the camera to try to discredit it in every way possible. Since you don't own one, you must be judging it's quality by OTHER peoples images, not even your own. That's no way to judge a camera. Or are you shallow enough to simply repeat what other people say about it without doing an actual real test of your own? Oh yes, you love to keep throwing out your responses that it's the noisest and the lowest resolution in the 5MP class. gee, i guess you are only going by Phil's resolution charts and comments. Explain to me when in "real life" you shoot resolution charts for pleasure or to than be able to show others your images and say to them " wow, look at the senis view of this interesting resolution chart". Personally, i don't give a rat's butt what resolution charts say or how much noise you may or may not see on a computer monitor. the only thing i use to really judge a photogragh is my own eyes. When i bought my D7 and than later bough a D7i i did all the camera comparisons by testing the camera, shooting them myself and PRINTING the images my self as i won't judge on a monitor. bottom line is the D7i still had the best overall colors of all the cameras, great focusing, best ergonomics for my hands, and most importantly, best overall image quality. Since this started about a discussion of noise, i'll end it that way. There is NO noise at all in my printed images from my D7i.

BTW, you are welcome to respond back but I'll not respond back to you again. Sorry, but after seeing your posts one after another trashing the Dimage cameras I had to get this out of my system. i'll not be wasting anymore time either reading or responding to your posts

Jim K said:

John Rushton said:

I agree with The Man. I have printed a Super A3 print using a
friend's D7i set to default setting and there is no visible noise
in the print. So why all excitement the about something that does
not show in practice?

Click to expand...

because it DOES show on prints. It's not rocket science to figure
out the better the image is to begin with the farther you can take
it or enlarge it. If a image has visible noise at 100% which is the
actual file size equal to a negative with dust or scratches
obviously it will not majically disapear as some will have us
believe. I have seen many prints with visible noise from various
consumer cameras. Now the d7's have the highest level of noise from
any 5MP camera and we are expected to believe that it just doesn't
show up on 8x10 or larger prints? If you buy that email me because
I have a wonderful bridge for sale too. It's so very simple, if you
don't mind the noise, that's great, have a ball, but don't try
misleading others in to believing there is no problem with the
noise. The only way the noise is not visible is if you down size
the image for the web, or make smaller prints. Why some people feel
the need to defend a company for inferior quality issues is beyond
me. It's called, denial, justify, excuse, and deny some more.
Thankfully common sense usually prevails. If you start of with more
noise then any other camera, obviously there is a problem otherwise
why even discus noise at all? The mentality that it doesn't matter
if you see it on screen, you won't see it on print is so
ridiculous. If that's the case then why bother with noise
reduction? Why spend $3000 for a camera with no noise if the D7i
which has the most noise of all, will still get prints without
noise? Now about that bridge for sale...

Regards,
Jim K

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!
http://digitalphotonews.ws

Click to expand...

yes Brian, all the 5MP cameras use the same CCD. That includes the 707/717, D7i/D7Hi, CP5000 and CP5700 and the E20

Brian said:

My question is: Is there anyone out there that can confirm that
the 707/717 and the D7's have the same sensor?

Jim K said:

John Rushton said:

I agree with The Man. I have printed a Super A3 print using a
friend's D7i set to default setting and there is no visible noise
in the print. So why all excitement the about something that does
not show in practice?

Click to expand...

because it DOES show on prints. It's not rocket science to figure
out the better the image is to begin with the farther you can take
it or enlarge it. If a image has visible noise at 100% which is the
actual file size equal to a negative with dust or scratches
obviously it will not majically disapear as some will have us
believe. I have seen many prints with visible noise from various
consumer cameras. Now the d7's have the highest level of noise from
any 5MP camera and we are expected to believe that it just doesn't
show up on 8x10 or larger prints? If you buy that email me because
I have a wonderful bridge for sale too. It's so very simple, if you
don't mind the noise, that's great, have a ball, but don't try
misleading others in to believing there is no problem with the
noise. The only way the noise is not visible is if you down size
the image for the web, or make smaller prints. Why some people feel
the need to defend a company for inferior quality issues is beyond
me. It's called, denial, justify, excuse, and deny some more.
Thankfully common sense usually prevails. If you start of with more
noise then any other camera, obviously there is a problem otherwise
why even discus noise at all? The mentality that it doesn't matter
if you see it on screen, you won't see it on print is so
ridiculous. If that's the case then why bother with noise
reduction? Why spend $3000 for a camera with no noise if the D7i
which has the most noise of all, will still get prints without
noise? Now about that bridge for sale...

Regards,
Jim K

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!
http://digitalphotonews.ws

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The Man said:

ah, Jim - I just stated i get NO noise at all in my prints and
another poster comfirmed he gets the same results. Are you calling
both of us liars? Since you don't own a D7i where do you feel you
have the gall to disagree with my results.

Click to expand...

Because I had a D7, D7i, and you can bet your britches I will get a D7H to test out. I also speak from first hand experience, and have seen various efforts from the 7's. I personally know of two store owners who now refuse to carry any thing by Minolta becaus of the unusually high return rates the D7 AND the D7i had.

I am entiteld to disagree with you, if you want to interpret it as name calling thats up to you. My opinion is either you can't see the noise for whatever reason, or you don't call it noise. Any way even if 10 posters suddenly agreed with you, it would not change the simple fact that there will be noise on the print if it was present on the original file. It's just the way it is. The only mission or crusade I am on is simply calling it like it is. I don't give a rats as if it's Minolta, Canon, or Nikon. I'm sorry if the truth bothers you, but igoring it or denying it won't change it.

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!
http://digitalphotonews.ws

It's amazing how you can get such different results from the same sensor.

The Man said:

Brian said:

My question is: Is there anyone out there that can confirm that
the 707/717 and the D7's have the same sensor?

Jim K said:

John Rushton said:

I agree with The Man. I have printed a Super A3 print using a
friend's D7i set to default setting and there is no visible noise
in the print. So why all excitement the about something that does
not show in practice?

Click to expand...

because it DOES show on prints. It's not rocket science to figure
out the better the image is to begin with the farther you can take
it or enlarge it. If a image has visible noise at 100% which is the
actual file size equal to a negative with dust or scratches
obviously it will not majically disapear as some will have us
believe. I have seen many prints with visible noise from various
consumer cameras. Now the d7's have the highest level of noise from
any 5MP camera and we are expected to believe that it just doesn't
show up on 8x10 or larger prints? If you buy that email me because
I have a wonderful bridge for sale too. It's so very simple, if you
don't mind the noise, that's great, have a ball, but don't try
misleading others in to believing there is no problem with the
noise. The only way the noise is not visible is if you down size
the image for the web, or make smaller prints. Why some people feel
the need to defend a company for inferior quality issues is beyond
me. It's called, denial, justify, excuse, and deny some more.
Thankfully common sense usually prevails. If you start of with more
noise then any other camera, obviously there is a problem otherwise
why even discus noise at all? The mentality that it doesn't matter
if you see it on screen, you won't see it on print is so
ridiculous. If that's the case then why bother with noise
reduction? Why spend $3000 for a camera with no noise if the D7i
which has the most noise of all, will still get prints without
noise? Now about that bridge for sale...

Regards,
Jim K

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!
http://digitalphotonews.ws

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Jim

Would you mind posting the names and addresses of the 2 stores that won't carry minolta products any longer due to unusually high returns on dimage 7 and 7I's? If you don't want to post them here, please say so and I'll send you my email address.

Thanks

Jim K said:

The Man said:

ah, Jim - I just stated i get NO noise at all in my prints and
another poster comfirmed he gets the same results. Are you calling
both of us liars? Since you don't own a D7i where do you feel you
have the gall to disagree with my results.

Click to expand...

Because I had a D7, D7i, and you can bet your britches I will get a
D7H to test out. I also speak from first hand experience, and have
seen various efforts from the 7's. I personally know of two store
owners who now refuse to carry any thing by Minolta becaus of the
unusually high return rates the D7 AND the D7i had.

I am entiteld to disagree with you, if you want to interpret it as
name calling thats up to you. My opinion is either you can't see
the noise for whatever reason, or you don't call it noise. Any way
even if 10 posters suddenly agreed with you, it would not change
the simple fact that there will be noise on the print if it was
present on the original file. It's just the way it is. The only
mission or crusade I am on is simply calling it like it is. I
don't give a rats as if it's Minolta, Canon, or Nikon. I'm sorry if
the truth bothers you, but igoring it or denying it won't change it.

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!
http://digitalphotonews.ws

Click to expand...

--

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so